Create an Account
username: password:
  MemeStreams Logo

Off the couch


My Blog
My Profile
My Audience
My Sources
Send Me a Message

sponsored links

Swater's topics
Finance & Accounting
(Telecom Industry)
Current Events
  War on Terrorism
United States
   SF Bay Area
    SF Bay Area Events
    SF Bay Area News
International Relations
Politics and Law
  Civil Liberties
   Internet Civil Liberties
  Intellectual Property
  Human Computer Interaction
  Computer Networking
  Military Technology
  High Tech Developments

support us

Get MemeStreams Stuff!

Current Topic: Telecom Industry

What's behind the DoD's asinine reaction to WiFi 'Peril:?
Topic: Telecom Industry 5:38 pm EST, Dec 29, 2002

] "WiFi is scaring the government not because it's a tool
] of terrorism but because it's a tool of unregulated
] political dissent. "

This article misses the giant economic impact of giving away free 802.11 access on the business models of the major carriers/service providers, some of whom have spent billions on G3 license purchases. But it's still a fun little rant.

What's behind the DoD's asinine reaction to WiFi 'Peril:?

RE: Telecommunications layoffs mount worldwide
Topic: Telecom Industry 3:25 am EST, Dec 19, 2002

swater wrote:

] again. To them it's just the inherent problem of market
] economies, but there's got to be a way around this besides
] cumbersome planned economies. Ideas??

One problem is that the analysts aren't objective. They are too tied into everything. Its more then just the auditors doing the accounting, its the investment banks doing the IPOs. There needs to be more checks and balances in the way the financial system is organized.

I think that one could fund a non profit analyst firm. The guys are simply not allowed to own stocks or do anything but publish, and the publications are free. Like an NPR for detailed market analysis. One way to do this would be through government funding, but then it gets political. If it was totally independant, well funded, and properly staffed, then it might provide a reasonable buffer against instability.

A easier solution would be to fund a buffer organization which simply runs advertisements on financial news programs that present information counter to the grain of the market direction WHATEVER that may be. An organization that is specifically intended to identify and fight market irrationality.

Another thing, which has been discussed here before, is the need for strong economic leadership from the top. The president needs to make people FEEL confident that things are under control and moving forward, and there are things to look forward too and work for. This president is not doing this at all.

However, sometimes you just CAN'T tell whats going to happen. Look at telecom right now.

1. Will wireless eliminate the demand for pots lines?
2. What will drive domestic broadband demand? VoIP, Online Games, a solution to the copyright problem? If any, then when, exactly?
3. Will WiFi or 3G win the coming wireless wars?
4. Will asset based telecom take off? To what extent?
5. If/when 2 happens, how rapidly will the RBOCs shift to an IP based infrastructure? Will Nortel and Lucent be able to translate the IP oriented companies they bought during the boom into products that will meet this demand, or will Cisco or a startup snap up all of this stuff?
6. Will the "stupid net" actually prevail, or will demand for higher quality synchronous communications and better network security lead to something more like ATM? If the later, then how will things evolve in that direction from the existing IP based network? (Will MPLS and RSVP provide similar capability? Will the service providers prefer to give priority to packets based on who sent them rather then on what they contain?)

These are all interesting things to think about. Lots of people seem to have strong opinions, but I don't buy it. It seems like trying to figure out who was going to own the PC market in 2002 by looking at the situation in 1982. We might be able to make some technological predictions, but the social situation, and which companies will do the right things.... thats almost impossible to predict accurately.

RE: Telecommunications layoffs mount worldwide

Some thoughts on that last post...
Topic: Telecom Industry 3:25 am EST, Dec 19, 2002

1. Ultimately, No. Wires supply bandwidth to wireless endpoint devices. Small cells = more bandwidth. This means you're going to want a wire in your house, just like you have now. There may be a transitional phase where you are routing backbone traffic across a wireless device, but eventually you're going to want that bandwidth locally. This is especially true in urban areas. Rural areas may need less in the way of wires. You may see rural wired telecom go away.

2. I want a device that streams over wifi and is a phone and is a PDA and is an mp3 player. Streaming will provide a short term IP solution. VoIP will happen because I don't want to also carry a phone, so my wifi phone from my house is also my wifi phone outside my house is also my ipod...

3. WiFi sort of. More bandwidth will be allocated. It will be more controlled. It will look a little like cellular ultimately, but more open. You'll have the same sort of AP in your house that your cellular company has out in the street. Small cells win. Platforms you can innovate on win. Using the same network card in my house, office, and on the street wins. 3G is a high power big cell solution that doesn't work for everything. You will PAY to use your neighbor's wifi. The networks will charge a flat rate and pay people who run access points a metered amount.

4. I have no idea. In some cases yes. In other cases no. This is basically how telcos generate cash to pay down debt; let the local government eat them... It will depend on how well the telco managers deal with their debt problems, if they can be dealt with at all.

5. The cost of dealing with this on top of the current debt load could really kill the RBOCS. I have no idea about Cisco/Lucent/Nortel.

6. I don't know on the technical side. However, I think the IETF is too dogmatic for its own good. Its totally subverted by the vendors and cannot see its own flaws. It may become irrelevant very rapidly as running code tends not to be produced there anymore. The market makes you interoperate, and having a standard is as easy as publishing a document. Interoperable standards always win. If people need QOS, the networks will build it. The networks will eliminate IP spoofing and solve the relay problem. These will be features that the router companies offer the ISPs/updates to sendmail. You will need to explicitly tell the network if you want to provide a service, and your OS will update automatically every night. You may do MPLS tagging on your desktop. The networks can enforce MTUs. It will be "IP" but it might look a hell of a lot like ATM and the network will become as smart as possible in an attempt to avoid commoditization of the service.

Now, who the hell should I invest in? I have no idea who is going to make the right decisions here, and there are many people in positions to do so. Shame I'm not one of them.

Some thoughts on that last post...

Telecommunications layoffs mount worldwide
Topic: Telecom Industry 1:03 am EST, Dec 18, 2002

"underscore the anarchy and lack of planning within the
capitalist system..."

Yeah, yeah. Minus the socialist yammering in this article, it has some great numbers on job cuts and investment which will help you explain to your mom why she's getting such a crappy christmas gift this year.

What the socialists don't really explore though is WHY millions of really smart people make enormously bad investing decisions create horrible supply imbalance over and over again. To them it's just the inherent problem of market economies, but there's got to be a way around this besides cumbersome planned economies. Ideas??

Telecommunications layoffs mount worldwide

Powered By Industrial Memetics